From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965740AbXCGXiR (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:38:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964793AbXCGXiR (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:38:17 -0500 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:39242 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2992743AbXCGXiQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2007 18:38:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:38:13 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20070307.153813.116350402.davem@davemloft.net> To: eparis@parisplace.org Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jamesm@namei.org, vyekkirala@trustedcs.com, cxzhang@watson.ibm.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfrm_policy delete security check misplaced From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1172860190.31047.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1172860190.31047.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.1.52 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Eric Paris Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:29:50 -0500 > The security hooks to check permissions to remove an xfrm_policy were > actually done after the policy was removed. Since the unlinking and > deletion are done in xfrm_policy_by* functions this moves the hooks > inside those 2 functions. There we have all the information needed to > do the security check and it can be done before the deletion. Since > auditing requires the result of that security check err has to be passed > back and forth from the xfrm_policy_by* functions. > > This patch also fixes a bug where a deletion that failed the security > check could cause improper accounting on the xfrm_policy > (xfrm_get_policy didn't have a put on the exit path for the hold taken > by xfrm_policy_by*) > > It also fixes the return code when no policy is found in > xfrm_add_pol_expire. In old code (at least back in the 2.6.18 days) err > wasn't used before the return when no policy is found and so the > initialization would cause err to be ENOENT. But since err has since > been used above when we don't get a policy back from the xfrm_policy_by* > function we would always return 0 instead of the intended ENOENT. Also > fixed some white space damage in the same area. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Paris Applied.